It'll probably accumulate a bigger star cast too by the time they're done just like Babylon. Hopefully BO doesn't go the same way.
It set me thinking when was the last time a non-arthouse meta movie about the inside workings of Hollywood made even decent ($100m+ or even $50m+) money? The Fall Guy made $91m but it was a failure. Don't think post Covid there's been any big success. Last ones I can think of are Once Upon A Time in Hollywood or La La Land (which referenced Hollywood very slightly without showing it too much) around a decade back & they got both critical/public acclaim. Maybe the public isn't so fascinated by Hollywood insider stories anymore? Maybe because stars are no longer a mystery to them, given their lives /access to them is available on the internet 365 days a year via social media? Also perhaps we live in an era that isn't so fascinated with most things that happened before the 21st Century (in case of period Hollywood films)? Maybe because people's (masses not film aficionados) choices are largely limited to IP-led fare or horror stories? Do people here have any theories on this? Was even wondering how Nancy Meyer got the decent sized budget for a movie on a subject matter that isn't exactly selling like hot cakes. Perhaps just on her past track record?
* Not that arthouse ones make money but their focus is award noms & many of them are still successful at that (Mank/Trumbo/The Fableman's etc)
** Not counting biopics esp music star led ones (Elvis/Rocketman) as a 'peek inside Hollywood' story even though movie star biopics also haven't done $100m at BO of late, they're either aimed at awards (Judy) or outperformed on a tiny budget (Reagan) with ~$20-30m BO or perhaps gone direct to streaming (Blonde).
